Another IRS Official Pleads the Fifth

Earlier this month, IRS Official Lois Lerner invoked her fifth amendment right in front of the House Oversight Committee. Today, at another Oversight Committee hearing, the second IRS Official did so. His name is Gregory Roseman and he is the Deputy Director, Enterprise Networks and Tier Systems Support.

Roseman appears to have had a 'cozy' relationship with the president of a company called Strong Castle, which allegedly received preferential treatment from the IRS, via Roseman. Here is Chairman Darrell Issa's exchange with Roseman, during with the latter initially started to say he chose to 'waive' his fifth amendment right before his counsel caught him.

Via Oversight:





Now let's go to  Committee member, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who never fails to disappoint. In this video, he starts out by pressing Beth Tucker, Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support, about why Roseman was not fired after texting allegedly despicable 'homophobic slurs' in his official capacity with the IRS. Tucker had more than just a little trouble answering Gowdy's questions.

The congressman from South Carolina then turned his attention to Strong Castle President and CEO, Braulio Castillo.



Trey Gowdy is in the wrong job; he should be Attorney General.

Video: More fireworks between Darrell Issa and Eric Holder

Over the past couple of years, there have quite a few epic exchanges between Rep. Darrell Issa and Attorney General Eric Holder, mostly over Operation Fast and Furious. Issa, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, is also a member of the House Judiciary Committee, which is where he often appears a bit more unfettered with respect to challenging Holder. As such, the Judiciary Committee is where the most compelling exchanges between the two men usually takes place.

Yesterday was no exception and it didn't even involve questions about any of the three major scandals that have befallen the White House in recent days.

Some might remember Barack Obama's controversial appointment of Thomas Perez as Secretary of Labor a couple of months ago. Over the past several years, Perez had been the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights division. Aside from his extremely suspect testimony in front of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights about the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) case or his involvement in targeting the state of Arizona back in 2010 over SB 1070, an immigration law signed by Governor Jan Brewer, Perez was also involved in shady quid pro quo deal with the state of Minnesota.

This is what Issa decided to hammer Holder over yesterday and it was, again, epic. As an added bonus, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (the registered Democratic socialist who asked where on the planet Mars astronauts planted the U.S. flag) butts in without having a case. If she was smart enough to understand how stupid she looked, she wouldn't have butted in at all.

For a fuller appreciation of what was going on here, PowerLine wrote about the case back in March and lays it out quite well.

This is a must-watch, even if it isn't about any of the three big scandals.

Audio: Today's Podcast

On today's show...

Analysis of the Oversight Committee hearing on Benghazi.

Video: Darrell Issa previews Benghazi hearings on Face the Nation

House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) appeared on Face the Nation to preview the May 8th Benghazi hearings. Gregory Hicks will be one of those witnesses and the quotes attributed to him that were read by host Bob Schieffer were indeed shocking. Without question, UN Ambassador Susan Rice's five Sunday show appearances on 9/16/12 - five days after the attacks - will come under renewed and even more intense scrutiny.

May 8th is likely going to be very significant.



During an appearance on Fox News one day earlier, former UN Ambassador John Bolton expressed shock at how high up the chain of command the whistleblowers go. Hicks - next in line after Stevens - is certainly an example of what Bolton was talking about.

Via Freedom's Lighthouse:

Consider the Nerve Struck: Democratic Congressman, registered socialist, and Congressional Black Caucus member Elijah Cummings wants Benghazi report rescinded

On Tuesday, April 23rd, a House Republican conference released a report that was quite damning of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Not only did it seem to have the goods on Hillary relative to a decision to withdraw security in Benghazi in the form of her signature but it also seemed to imply that she committed perjury back in January.

Now we know that at least one Democratic congressman - Elijah Cummings - who happens to be someone who registered with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) caucus and is currently a member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), just couldn't remain silent. This is almost always a sign that a nerve has been struck.

Via the AP:

A senior House Democrat called on House Speaker John Boehner Thursday to retract a report blaming former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for security deficiencies at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya before last September's deadly attack.

Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., said in a letter to Boehner that the report, written by the Republican chairmen of five committees, misrepresents an important document and suggests that Clinton lied to Congress. In addition to pulling the report, Cummings said, Boehner also should apologize to Clinton on behalf of the report's authors.

Here is what is alleged in the report:

April 19, 2012, the response cable from the Department of State to Embassy Tripoli, bearing Secretary Clinton’s signature, acknowledges Ambassador Cretz’s request for additional security but instead articulates a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including the Benghazi Mission.

Now, let's go back to the AP story:

...Cummings said his staff reviewed the cable, and it does not bear Clinton's signature. The cable includes only her typed name at the bottom of the page next to the word "signature," just as thousands of other cables sent each year from the State Department do.

This question that needs to be asked of Mr. Cummings is as follows:

Do you, sir, have any intellectual curiosity at all when it comes to who is specifically responsible for withdrawing security?

It would seem that if Hillary's name is next to the word "signature" and that the document does not bear her signature, someone treated a typed version of her name as authorization to act on something OTHER THAN her signature. Instead of going after the conference, shouldn't Cummings be going after whomever made that decision?

Better yet, why didn't Hillary?

Then again...

Same ATF that gave guns to Mexican Drug Cartels closes gun shop that LEGALLY sold gun to Newtown Shooter's mother

The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) was found to be responsible for telling gun store owners in Arizona to sell high capacity, semi-automatic weapons (AK-47's and .50 Cal) to straw purchasers, whom they knew would 'walk' those guns into Mexico. Those thousands of guns were placed into the hands of drug cartels who proceeded to murder hundreds of Mexicans and at least one Border Patrol agent (Brian Terry).

Now, that same ATF is has shut down a gun store that sold weapons to the mother of Newtown shooter Adam Lanza.

Via Reuters:

The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms said on Friday it had revoked the federal license of a Connecticut gun retailer that sold a weapon to the mother of Adam Lanza, who killed 26 people at an elementary school in December.

The agency on December 20 revoked the license of Riverview Gun Sales in East Windsor, Connecticut, ATF spokeswoman Debora Seifert said. The revocation was reported in The Journal News, of Westchester County, New York, on Friday.

"We did revoke their federal firearms license," she said. The agency did not publicly disclose a reason for the closure.

A woman who answered the telephone at Riverview on Friday, and did not give her name, confirmed the store had sold a weapon to Lanza's mother, Nancy, and that its license had been revoked. She declined further comment.

This may just be one of the most boldly audacious and outrageous moves by the Feds in some time. In operation Fast and Furious, the ATF has the blood of hundreds of Mexicans on its hands for telling gun store owners to sell weapons to buyers it knew would give them to drug cartels. Yet, no one at ATF has paid any real price. Now, the same ATF is shutting down a gun store that did nothing illegal?!?!

I sent the following email to Rep. Darrell Issa's press secretary, Becca Watkins:

Becca, where are you guys on this????

Without explanation, the ATF shuts down gun shop that sold guns to Adam Lanza's mother. Yet, the ATF FREAKIN' TOLD GUN STORES to sell to straw purchasers who put thousands of guns into the hands of cartels, who then proceeded to murder hundreds of Mexcians!!!

Where is Chairman Issa??????

Is he still there????

Issa is head of the House Oversight Committee and knows as much as anyone about what went on in Fast and Furious.

h/t WZ

Video: Senator Lindsey Graham calls out John Boehner over Benghazi

It would appear that Speaker John Boehner is feeling some heat directly from a Republican Senator in Lindsey Graham (R-SC) over getting to the bottom of the Benghazi attacks. During this interview, which took place last night, Graham said he would be meeting with House leaders "tomorrow" which is today. Can't wait to hear how that went.

Take note at the 3:00 mark. Shortly thereafter, Graham says:

"To my House colleagues, please, for God's sake step up your game when it comes to Benghazi."

I'd like to make a suggestion to Senator Graham. Pick of the phone and call Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight Committee. I'm guessing Issa is sure to give you an earful about how Boehner did more harm than good when it came to helping with the Fast and Furious investigation.

Holder fighting off FOIA request for Fast & Furious documents by refusing to respond to it

After Attorney General Eric Holder was found in both criminal and civil contempt of Congress for not releasing documents required by a lawfully issued subpoena by Congress, the U.S. Attorney responsible for prosecuting his boss on criminal grounds predictably decided not to do so for obvious reasons. That left the civil contempt charge, which served as the impetus for a lawsuit filed by the House Oversight Committee against Holder that is still pending.

These subpoenaed documents are the same ones over which Barack Obama asserted Executive Privilege to prevent from being released.

Concurrent with the civil lawsuit is an effort by a very effective Watchdog group to have the same documents released through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and it's causing Holder to react on a second front.

Via Judicial Watch:

Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a brief on January 15, 2013, in response to an Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) motion to indefinitely delay consideration of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking access to Operation Fast and Furious records withheld from Congress by President Obama under executive privilege on June 20, 2012 (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:12-cv-01510)).

Rather than respond substantively to Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit, the DOJ argued in court that the lawsuit should be subject to a stay of proceedings because it is “ancillary” to a separate lawsuit filed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee against the DOJ. The Court “should let the process of negotiation and accommodation [between the House Committee and the DOJ] run its course, and then decide with the input of the parties whether and how this action may appropriately proceed at that time,” the DOJ argued, effectively abrogating the FOIA. The Obama DOJ even suggested that the Judicial Watch litigation might encourage the Congress to fight harder to get the same documents in separate litigation.

To Judicial Watch's argument, consider an exchange between Issa - in his role as a member of the House Judiciary Committee and Holder on December 8, 2011. In the exchange (audio only), Issa was pressing Holder to admit that if the documents relative to Fast & Furious after March of 2011 are not released, the Attorney General will be found in contempt.

There are two very key points (the second is particularly important) expressed by Issa relative to these documents.

1. Issa explains that Holder must cite a Constitutional exemption for refusing to produce the documents.
2. Even if Holder magically cites an exemption, he is still required to produce a log of the documents.

To this point, Holder has done neither, which leaves Obama's assertion of Executive Privilege the lone justification for the American people not knowing the truth about Fast and Furious.

Of all the exchanges between Issa and Holder, this one may just be the best.

h/t Breitbart

Applying lessons learned from Fast and Furious investigation to Benghazi-gate

Attorney General Eric Holder recently told a class of law students that he may not be back for a second term. To say Holder's first term was scandal-ridden would be an understatement. Right out of the gate, after the Justice Department dropped charges against members of the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) related to voter intimidation, Holder was dogged by an investigation that just wouldn't go away for his first two years.

In November of 2010, the Civil Rights Commission found that Holder's Justice Department had created and implemented a policy that favored blacks over whites when it came to voting rights.

Approximately one month later, U.S. Border agent Brian Terry was gunned down in Arizona. Guns found at the scene were traced back to an ATF operation known as Fast and Furious. Whistleblowers came forward and informed the public through House Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa and Senate Judiciary ranking member Charles Grassley, that they were being told to let guns 'walk' into Mexico. What ensued was a nearly two year battle that ensnared the Justice Department. To this point, that investigation culminated with the Attorney General being found in both criminal and civil contempt of Congress for not honoring a subpoena for documents.

If not for the dogged pursuit of justice over Fast and Furious by a significant contingent of engaged Americans, conservative bloggers, and certain Republican members of Congress (particularly on Issa's committee), the scandal likely wouldn't have gotten as far as it did and Holder might not be mulling retirement right now.

To the extent that the Fast and Furious investigation was successful, it was hamstrung by a complicit media, a corrupt and hyper-partisan Democratic party, and Republican leadership that seemed disinterested in fighting the good fight. Speaker John Boehner rarely spoke about the scandal and when he did, his words were brief, measured, and virtually inconsequential. Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential nominee, rarely broached the subject when it would have been most effective; the third debate comes to mind.

Had Mitt Romney asked the president to explain why he asserted Executive Privilege to prevent the subpoenaed documents from being released to Congress, the mainstream media would have been forced to cover the story. Ditto if Boehner would have been more outspoken about the scandal. Any hopes that a Romney win would have given Republican leadership the opportunity to take the path of least resistance were dashed on November 6th.

Now that same Republican leadership has something much bigger and much more significant to deal with - an Obama second term and Benghazi-gate.

We're already seeing a willingness on the part of the mainstream media and the Democratic party to follow the same formula that either prevented or delayed justice in Fast and Furious. What we cannot afford is for Republican leadership to do the same. Benghazi is far worse than Fast and Furious. While Committee hearings appear to be in the offing - to include Issa's Oversight Committee - House leadership, to include John Boehner (assuming he's re-elected as Speaker), is more likely than not to attempt to avoid fighting that good fight again.

Some will say that Benghazi-gate will be dealt a blow as a direct result of the President's reelection. Again, however, had there been a responsible media to report on the scandal before the election, Obama likely would have lost.

Those of us who understand that 2+2=4 know that socialist, liberal economic policies are always doomed to fail. To the extent that they're implemented in Obama's second term, they will again. The United States is going to hit a very rough patch in the coming months / years. That, coupled with a very public, forceful, and united front from House Republicans and leadership on Benghazi-gate could lead to justice being done.

Getting to the bottom of Benghazi-gate will require much of what got us so close to getting to the bottom of Fast and Furious - whistleblowers, an informed and engaged public that demands answers, and committed Republicans on House Committees with fearless Republican chairmen. It will also require something we didn't have during the Fast and Furious investigation...

...a fearless Speaker.

Darrell Issa and Jason Chaffetz send another letter to Hillary

On the heels of a classified cable provided to Catherine Herridge of Fox News that shows Christopher Stevens issued a cry for help to Hillary Clinton's office on August 16th that was ultimately ignored, Foreign Policy has come into possession of two damning letters for the State Department, obtained from the consulate. House Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa and Rep. Jason Chaffetz have taken notice and are demanding answers from Clinton.

Via FP:

One letter, written on Sept. 11 and addressed to Mohamed Obeidi, the head of the Libyan Ministry of Foreign Affairs' office in Benghazi, reads:

"Finally, early this morning at 0643, September 11, 2012, one of our diligent guards made a troubling report. Near our main gate, a member of the police force was seen in the upper level of a building across from our compound. It is reported that this person was photographing the inside of the U.S. special mission and furthermore that this person was part of the police unit sent to protect the mission. The police car stationed where this event occurred was number 322."

The account accords with a message written by Smith, the IT officer who was killed in the assault, on a gaming forum on Sept. 11. "Assuming we don't die tonight. We saw one of our ‘police' that guard the compound taking pictures," he wrote hours before the assault.

A potential bold red flag is raised about Obeidi a little later in the article:

Obeidi, the Libyan official named on one of the printouts, said he had not received any such letter, adding, "I did not even know that the U.S. ambassador was visiting Benghazi." However, a spokesman for the Benghazi police confirmed that the ministry had notified the police of the ambassador's visit. "We did not receive that letter from the U.S. consulate. We received a letter from Ministry of Foreign Affairs Benghazi asking for additional security measures around consulate during visit of the ambassador. And the police provided all extra security which was asked for," the spokesman said.

So Obeidi is essentially pleading total ignorance when it comes to being aware that Stevens was even in  Benghazi while a spokesman for the police says his office was made aware. Perhaps the claim that Obeidi never saw one of the documents that mentioned him by name could be believed (because they were found in the consulate) but his not knowing that Stevens was in Benghazi strains credulity. Even if he is to be believed about that, he should have known, which still points to the likely infiltration of security forces.

Here is an excerpt from the letter to Clinton from Issa and Chaffetz:

These documents paint a disturbing picture indicating that elements of the Libyan government might have been complicit in the September 11, 2012, attack on the compound and the murder of four Americans. It also reiterates the fact that the U.S. government may have had evidence indicating that the attack was not a spontaneous event but rather a preplanned terrorist attack that included prior surveillance of the compound as a target.

Given the location where they were found, these documents appear to be genuine and support a growing body of evidence indicating that the Obama Administration has tried to withhold pertinent facts about the 9/11 anniversary attack from Congress and the American people.

Issa and Chaffetz conclude the letter with a demand for answers about why the State Department said there were no indications that anything was wrong at the consulate at all on 9/11/12. Pointing to an October 9, 2012 State Department briefing in which it was alleged that "Everything was calm at 8:30 p.m." the Oversight Committee members rightfully raise concerns that the documents recovered at the scene by FP belie that claim.

They want answers by November 8th.

To view the two documents recovered by FP, click here and scroll to page 4.

Second of three Oversight Committee reports on Fast and Furious released

The first of three reports released by the House Oversight Committee back on July 31st, honed in on ATF culpability with regard to operation Fast and Furious. The second report, released on October 29th, exposes the degree to which senior Department of Justice (DOJ) leadership not only looked the other way but had a hand in implementation.

The report begins with a prologue consisting of some intimate detail surrounding the ultimate decision of then Acting ATF Director Kenneth Melson to testify in front of Oversight Committee staffers. It does serve to garner at least a modicum of empathy for Melson while more outrage at the actions of senior DOJ leadership, about whom Melson asserted was "running the show".

Check out the opening stanza from the Executive Summary:

Operation Fast and Furious was not a strictly local operation conceived by a rogue ATF office in Phoenix, but rather the product of a deliberate strategy created at the highest levels of the Justice Department aimed at identifying the leaders of a major gun trafficking ring. This strategy, along with institutional inertia, led to the genesis, implementation, and year-long duration of Fast and Furious.

Like mad scientists concocting a toxic brew, a new strategy - that came down from on high at DOJ - to stop prosecuting straw purchasers and focus on cartels, coupled with the resurrection of the failed Operation Wide Receiver, gave birth to Fast and Furious in Phoenix.

Check out page 27 for another interesting distinction between Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious. It's revealed that in 2009, DOJ's Criminal Division assigned a prosecutor to review Wide Receiver (Laura Gwinn). In an email to that prosecutor by James Trusty (DOJ Main and liaison with prosecutors in Arizona), it was relayed that the Criminal Division's Assistant Attorney General, Lanny Breuer was "VERY interested in the Arizona gun trafficking case..." This was Wide Receiver and the report notes that no evidence was produced which showed Breuer's predecessor had ever been exposed to that operation; it appeared to have been shut down before that reality ever manifested itself.

This would mean that even with the gift of hindsight about how failed Wide Receiver had been and why it was shut down, Breuer was interested in playing with fire.

In a September 22, 2009 email that appears on page 29 of the report, Trusty tells Gwinn that "we're in good shape" if gun-walking is the only concern.

On page 39, the report has the following to say about how wiretap applications were able to get approved at the Criminal Division level of DOJ and, in so doing, makes it quite clear why Attorney General Eric Holder should be held accountable:

Put bluntly, the Department of Justice rubber stamped the most important documents in Fast and Furious. These applications authorized federal agents to continue using the very reckless tactics that Attorney General Holder and many others have condemned in recent months. Rubber stamping these applications allowed the Department plausible deniability about the evidence of gunwalking tactics contained in the applications. The senior Department officials legally obligated to sign the applications did not actually read the documents they were signing. 

Congress demanded heightened scrutiny of these applications by senior officials because they are such an invasive law enforcement technique. Congress vested the power to authorize such applications in the Attorney General or certain of his subordinates, and not in a lower level Justice Department employee. To “authorize” in any meaningful sense must include a review of the document being authorized. By failing to properly read or review these applications before authorizing them, senior Department officials are undermining the law.

Holder's defense in countless appearance before various Senate and House committees was that because so much crosses his desk, he couldn't possibly have been able to read them all. This defense is torpedoed in the above paragraphs. Holder knew or should have known. As such, he has no business being the Attorney General.

Another bombshell is dropped on page 49 as it is revealed that in March of 2010, the Acting Deputy Attorney General Gary Grindler, who was the position's placeholder between David Ogden and James Cole - who assumed office two weeks after Brian Terry's murder - was briefed on the details of Fast and Furious. This would mean that detailed information about Fast and Furious was known by Eric Holder's immediate subordinate approximately nine months before the death of Brian Terry.

According to the report, the multiple red flags that would have been raised in any detailed briefing about Fast and Furious, at minimum, were not seen by Grindler.

On page 61, email correspondence between Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein and Lanny Breuer clearly demonstrated that both men knew that guns were walking but were more concerned about how such a reality would play in the media than with the bloody consequences that should have been of an even greater concern.

This paragraph on page 73 says quite a bit:

Acting Deputy Attorney General Gary Grindler took a management approach of delegating tasks and responsibilities to his subordinates and then remaining uninvolved until problems were brought to his attention. This management style insulated him from problems occurring beneath him. Instead of accepting responsibility for his leadership shortcomings, Grindler instead passed the buck to his underlings.

Considering that Grindler held the number two position at DOJ - right below Holder - at the time, he is precariously close to being the highest ranking DOJ official with direct culpability in Fast and Furious, if one is inclined to believe Holder's testimony. The decision not to manage subordinates is a decision to allow their activities to continue. The subsequent interview transcript excerpts involving testimony from Grindler is mind-numbing. His professed ignorance on multiple fronts is simply not the least bit plausible.

This particular sentence from the report says quite a bit:

Senior Justice Department officials were not eager to find out what was going on at ATF during Fast and Furious. After its failure, they were even less inclined to do so.

Investigators concluded that the approach of Holder's Deputy Chief of Staff, Monty Wilkinson, was similar to that of Grindler. When it came to Fast and Furious, they were quite hands-off.

After including relevant testimony from Grindler, Wilkinson and Ed Siskel (Associate Deputy Attorney General at the time) the following conclusion appears on page 82 of the report:

The Office of the Attorney General thought that the Office of the Deputy Attorney General exercised supervision over ATF. The Deputy Attorney General thought his staff, Ed Siskel in particular, exercised supervision over ATF. Ed Siskel did not see it as his responsibility to supervise ATF—even though ATF believed that it needed to report to Ed Siskel. In other words, the management structure at Department headquarters allowed for zero oversight of ATF, with no single person believing it was their responsibility to supervise the agency.

The report then focuses on Attorney General Eric Holder, who stated in an October, 2011 letter that he doesn't read all of the memos and weekly reports, that he relies on...

"Attorneys in my office and in the Office of the Deputy Attorney General to review these weekly reports..."

This poses an obvious problem because the people Holder said would bring any issues to his attention operated under similar guidelines; they would only pay attention if something was brought to their attention.

How about plans for Eric Holder to participate in a press conference touting the success of the Operation Fast and Furious investigation? On page 16 of the report, it's revealed that Holder's Deputy Chief of Staff was making attempts to get his boss to appear at a press conference to speak about Fast and Furious but that the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry led to Dennis Burke, U.S. Attorney for Arizona, recommending against it.

Then, on page 91 of the report, we get specifics:

On December 14, 2010, before Brian Terry was killed, Holder’s Deputy Chief of Staff Monty Wilkinson e-mailed Dennis Burke. The subject of the e-mail was “You available for a call today?”

At 12:28pm that day, Burke sent an email saying that Holder was interested in attending the press conference about Fast and Furious. Obviously, shortly after the midnight, hours later, Brian Terry was murdered and guns from Fast and Furious were recovered at the scene.

Emails show that it was known by late in the day on December 15th about the Fast and Furious connection to Terry's murder.

On page 100 of the report is a screen shot of an email from Burke to Wilkinson dated December 21st, 2010 - five days after Terry's death - advising that Holder not attend the Fast and Furious press conference.

A striking fact in all of this is that Wilkinson testified that he didn't remember much about the communications via email with Burke in the hours and days surrounding Terry's death, which is difficult to believe after such a tragedy being tied back to an ATF operation. Terry's murder should have been a "do you remember where you were when" moments.

The investigators seemed to reach that conclusion as well, on page 102:

Although both Wilkinson and Burke testified they had no memory of phone calls or communications about Fast and Furious and Agent Terry’s death, documents suggest that there was an immediate and obvious instinct to protect the Attorney General from being associated with an obviously controversial operation.

Essentially, the "collective memory loss" on the part of Holder's immediate subordinate is not the least bit believable.

The report's conclusion on page 104 is a must-read. Here is a link to the accompanying exhibits.

Obama administration lies about Benghazi documents released by Issa

On October 19th, Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa publicly released 166 pages of documents, 45 photos, and the 10-page letter he had sent to Barack Obama. The letter included ten questions Issa wanted the president to answer. It also implicated Obama as being personally responsible in his role as chairman of the National Security Council, which Issa identified specifically as the entity that likely made the decisions that put Americans in danger.

The Obama administration quickly attempted to say that by releasing this information, Issa has put a human rights activist in danger. In a press release, Issa's team debunks this feeble attempt by the administration to shift the focus of the debate by using a female activist as a political prop (which is apparently supposed to feed the 'war on women' narrative).

Here is a portion of Issa's statement:

“The Libyan rights activist who was highlighted by the Obama administration in news accounts as having not been, ‘publicly associated with the U.S.’ until the Oversight Committee released documents had actually been brought to the U.S. in December 2011 by the State Department and her trip is highlighted on the Internet. President Obama should be ashamed of yet another example where his administration has been caught trying to mislead the American people about what happened in Libya.”

“Obama Administration officials and their surrogates are clearly reeling from revelations about how the situation in Benghazi was mishandled and are falsely politicizing the issue in a last ditch effort to save President Obama’s reelection effort.  To see such prominent officials as Sen. John Kerry, Sen. Dick Durbin, Sen. Carl Levin, Rahm Emanuel, and Obama Senior Advisor David Axelrod paraded out over to weekend to make false charges about the Oversight Committee putting Libyans in danger only shows their desperation to hide the truth. As the Committee had previously indicated, the State Department has had these documents for two weeks but never contacted the committee about making specific redactions. The Libyans noted in these documents worked in positions where their interactions with westerners would not be surprising.”

The Obama administration attempted to portray this woman as someone who isn't associated with the U.S. except for the cable that mentions her, which it says puts her in danger. Issa's staff is pointing to a video that features this activist as well as a public State Department event in late 2011 for the International Visitor Program of the World Affairs Council, at which she was hosted.

Here is the video of her on the internet, speaking out against the Libyan transitional government and she is wearing a badge that clearly says, "United States Department of State".

Issa points finger directly at Obama in letter over Benghazi-gate

There was quite an interesting mass e-mail waiting for me this morning from Darrell Issa's press secretary. In a letter sent to Barack Obama by Oversight Committee chairman Issa and Committee member, Jason Chaffetz, the two Republicans are asking some very hard questions and demanding answers about Benghazi-gate. The implied charge is made fairly early on in the letter that the poor security which existed in Libya was the result of a policy of "normalization" in that country. If true, that would make the deaths of the U.S. Ambassador to Libya along with three other Americans, the likely result of political decisions.

From the very first paragraph of the letter, via Oversight:

Information supplied to the committee by senior officials demonstrates that not only did the administration repeatedly reject requests for increased security despite escalating violence, but it also systematically decreased existing security to dangerous and ineffective levels. We have been told repeatedly that the administration did this to effectuate a policy of "normalization" in Libya after the conclusion of its civil war. These actions not only resulted in extreme vulnerability, but also undermined Ambassador Stevens and the diplomatic mission.

Issa also called Obama on the fact that several members of his administration - to include Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vice President Joe Biden, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, and White House press secretary Jay Carney - repeatedly blamed the attack on Innocence of Muslims, an anti-Muhammad video. After factoring in the matter of the video, one can easily connect the dots of plausibility:

...if administration officials indeed reviewed security reports on a daily basis, they would have seen the overwhelming evidence prior to the 9/11 attack that terrorists were actively targeting westerners in Benghazi.

This introduces three variables into the investigation.

1. Normalization: The administration wanted to 'normalize' Libya after Gadhafi was overthrown, a noble goal to be sure but not one that should be wished into existence for political reasons, especially if an opposite reality is the one that exists. 'Normalization' may just be the key to unlocking much of what happened.
2. Implausible Deniability: Between the number of catalogued security incidents and the repeated requests for beefed up security, there were far too many red flags for decision-makers in the administration to be able to claim plausible deniability if something happened. Something did happen; four Americans were murdered (not reading reports and memos was an excuse given by Eric Holder in the Fast and Furious investigation).
3. The Video: If normalization was the goal and denial of security was the means, we're talking major scandal in the wake of four dead Americans. It would point to a political agenda trumping human life (Fast and Furious was about furthering the gun control agenda by putting guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels that resulted in ending many human lives). That's before we get to any sort of cover-up. A consequence (unintended or otherwise) of blaming the video, was that Obama administration actually aligned itself with the Islamists, who pointed to the video as a reason to criminalize any speech critical of Islam. In blaming the video, the Obama administration was facilitating attacks on the first amendment.

Back to the letter...

According to Assistant Regional Security Officer David Oliveira - who was stationed in Benghazi from June 2, 2012, to July 5, 2012 - "they (local guard force) felt that the U.S. was a target and they felt that they didn't want to work overnight... A Facebook posting also called for the assassination of Ambassador Stevens and provided details of his jogging route in Tripoli along with his picture.

Issa points to an unfathomable event in Benghazi that was met with an unfathomable non-response from Washington, smack dab in the middle of that June 2 - July 5 window:

...al Qaeda organized a rally in Benghazi. On or about June 10, 2012, fighters from Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, and Mali paraded through the streets with weapons and black flags... These events were the subject of an early July country team meeting where Ambassador Stevens and others expressed their concerns about these develeopments and the need for increased security. According to one participant, this "fell like a dead fish on the table" because everyone, including Ambassador Stevens, knew that the Embassy lacked support from Washington, D.C., and could do little about it.

Also within that time frame - on June 6th, in the middle of the night - a white truck approached the compound, an Islamist got out of the truck, and placed a bomb along the consulate's perimeter wall. Check out the first 17 of these 45 photos provided by sent as attachments to the letter. The first three show the white truck approaching the front gate. Photos 4-17 show the hole that was blown through the perimeter wall.

With that as a backdrop, check out this excerpt from Issa's October 19th letter (page 6):

In August 2012, Ambassador Stevens continued to warn Main State of a "security vacuum" being exploited by independent actors. He further noted that "Islamist extremists are active." His warnings culminated with two cables in September 2012 in which he notified the State Department that Benghazi had entered a state of "maximum alert" and that Islamist influence was expanding in Derna. His last notification came on September 11, 2012, the day he was assassinated.

Ranking member of the Oversight Committee, while accusing Issa of playing election year politics with the Benghazi attack, apparently decided to engage in some politicizing of his own. Before I get into the "normalization" aspect of Issa's letter, take a look at what Cummings said at the October 10th hearing. Also take note of the, 'never let a crisis go to waste' dynamic at work here. Cummings alleges that Republicans in the House cut funding for security. Cummings likely saw a two-birds-with-one-stone opportunity.

By pointing to Republicans, he attempted to shift blame for Stevens' murder away from the administration and toward Issa's Party. He was also shamelessly attempting to lay the ground work for increased funding as a direct result of this attack.



There are a few problems for Cummings at this point. First, according to Issa's letter (page 8), the cost of the Security Support Team (SST) in question was absorbed by the Defense Department, not the State Department. Second, the State Department actually increased "danger pay" for its employees in Libya while removing security. Third, Charlene Lamb, the woman who withheld security from Benghazi, testified at the October 10th hearing that lack of funding had nothing to do with the withdrawal of security:



Also on page 8 of Issa's letter, he writes the following:

According to witnesses and documents received by the Committee, the administration made a policy decision to place Libya into a "normalized" country status as quickly as possible. The normalization process... appeared to have been aimed at conveying the impression that the situation in Libya was getting better, not worse.

Before concluding the letter, Issa points a finger directly at the White House National Security Council (NSC), which is chaired by the President of the United States. In essence, Issa is pointing the finger of culpability directly at Obama himself:

These critical foreign policy decisions are not made by low or mid-level career officials - they are typically made through a structured and well-reasoned process that includes the National Security Council at the White House. The ultimate responsibility rests with you as the President of the United States.

To underscore this point, check out this excerpt from Whitehouse.gov about who makes up the NSC and who attends the meetings:

The NSC is chaired by the President. Its regular attendees (both statutory and non-statutory) are the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the statutory military advisor to the Council, and the Director of National Intelligence is the intelligence advisor. The Chief of Staff to the President, Counsel to the President, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy are invited to attend any NSC meeting. The Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget are invited to attend meetings pertaining to their responsibilities. The heads of other executive departments and agencies, as well as other senior officials, are invited to attend meetings of the NSC when appropriate.

I've posted this exchange between Lamb and Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL) from the October 10th hearing before but it's provides a look into how the Oversight Committee might best proceed in the context of determining the level of culpability the NSC might have had in the deaths. The relevant portion comes in the first minute. Note how Adams asks Lamb if the latter had sole discretion to deny security to the consulate. After being told "no", Lamb is asked to provide names of those who did. She coughs up two names at the 1:00 mark.



If the NSC is responsible, those two men didn't have sole discretion either. Both should be placed under oath and be made to tell the committee if they acted on their own or were instructed to refuse security requests.

Elijah Cummings, member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) caucus (code for Communists) will not be happy:

Cummings: Running interference for Obama is tough business

Shocker: DOJ seeks to dismiss Fast & Furious lawsuit

Attorney General Eric Holder was found to be in both criminal and civil contempt of Congress for not releasing documents subpoenaed in the Fast and Furious investigation. As was expected, the criminal conviction would go nowhere because Holder's subordinate is the individual responsible for prosecuting it (gotta protect the boss). That left the civil contempt conviction. The House Oversight Committee filed a lawsuit to demand the release of the documents. Barack Obama asserted Executive Privilege in order to prevent their release. He did so on the day Holder was found to be in contempt.

Now, the Justice Department is seeking a dismissal of the civil suit.

Via CBS News:

The Justice Department says federal courts should stay out of a political dispute between the Obama administration and Congress over documents in a botched law enforcement probe of gun trafficking.

In court papers filed Monday night, the department is seeking dismissal of a lawsuit by a Republican-led House committee, which is demanding that Attorney General Eric Holder produce records about Operation Fast and Furious.

The Justice Department says the Constitution does not permit the courts to resolve the political dispute between the executive branch and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The political branches have a long history of resolving disputes over congressional requests without judicial intervention, the court filing said.

President Barack Obama has invoked executive privilege and the attorney general has been found in contempt of the House for refusing to turn over records that might explain what led the department to reverse course after initially denying that federal agents had used a controversial tactic called gun-walking in the failed law enforcement operation.

There seems to be a slight problem with this argument. In U.S. v. Nixon, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that president could not assert Executive Privilege to cover up any crimes that had been committed.

A central component in the documents subpoenaed in Fast and Furious has to do with a February 4, 2011 letter signed by then Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich and addressed to Senator Charles Grassley. That letter alleged that the ATF was not allowing guns to walk into Mexico. Ten months later, the letter was withdrawn because its main assertion had been disproven.

Many of the documents subpoenaed are thought to provide some answers as to how that letter was written in the first place as well as what transpired in the months afterward.

If the precedent in this case is U.S. v. Nixon, a dismissal at this stage should not be considered likely. Then again, we've all seen some bizarre rulings these days.

Video: Elijah Cummings assuming same role he did in Fast and Furious

For nearly two years, we watched as ranking member of the House Oversight committee ran interference for the Department of Justice and the Obama administration in the Fast and Furious investigation. He's picking right up where he left off with the investigation into what happened at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi.

It really is shameful to watch someone be this much of a partisan hack when it comes to defending policies and operations that led to murder.

For Cummings to say that the investigation into what happened in Benghazi is a 'witch hunt' is beyond disgraceful.

Note how Cummings makes the charge that people are reaching conclusions too soon while completely avoiding the fact that the Obama administration concluded rather early that the attack was the result of the anti-Muhammad video. It has now been caught pushing a demonstrably false narrative and Cummings doesn't want to talk about that?!

He also takes a page out of the 'never let a crisis go to waste' manual by pointing to a Congressional vote to cut funding for security. That is a straw man for a couple of reasons. During testimony at last week's hearing, State Department officials said reduced security had nothing to do with a lack of funding.

Moreover, Cummings decries politicizing this while pointing to the attack as a reason for more 'supplemental' funding for security.

Also, let's not forget that Cummings is registered member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) caucus, which is just a nice way of saying the Lying Communists Caucus (LCC).

Here is Cummings' interview on Face the Nation:



h/t Right Newz

**UPDATE** One of the arguments in the video above from Cummings is that Republicans voted to cut funding for security. Despite the aforementioned testimony from State Department officials that funding had nothing to do with short-changing the consulate, it appears Mr. Cummings has himself another problem.

Via POLITICO:

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) says the State Department is sitting on $2.2 billion that should be spent on upgrading security at U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide, but the Obama administration will not spend the funds.

Issa made his comment during an appearance on CBS's "Face the Nation" to discuss the recent attack in Benghazi, Libya, that left U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead. Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, held a highly partisan hearing on the incident last week.

Issa claims the State Department will not spend the already approved funds because they didn't want to the appearance of needing increased security.

 Yet another fact ready and waiting for the likes of Elijah Cummings to ignore.

Videos: Highlights from today's Oversight Committee hearing on Benghazi attacks

The Oversight Committee on Government Reform, chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa convened a hearing today on the 9/11/12 attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi Libya. There were two primary issues addressed relative to the attacks. One dealt with the huge lapse in security that led to the deaths of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. The other was the Obama administration's insistence for days afterward that the attack was "spontaneous" and the result of the Innocence of Muslims video.

Four people testified today - two good guys and two questionable characters. First the good guys.

Lt. Col. Andrew Wood, Utah National Guard who headed a security team in Benghazi. You can read his testimony here. As I wrote previously, he is a whistleblower who decided it was better to come forward than to sit back, regardless of consequences.

Eric Nordstrom, Regional Security Officer (RSO), U.S. State Department. He asserts that he asked State main to provide additional security but was denied. His testimony can be found here.

Now on to the bureaucrats...

Ms. Charlene R. Lamb, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Programs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, U.S. State Department. She was one of Nordstrom's points of contact when the RSO contacted the State Department for more security in Libya. She was on the hot seat much of the day, and rightfully so. Here is her written testimony.

Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, Under Secretary for Management U.S. Department of State. Like Lamb, Kennedy took some tough questions. Here is his testimony.

As for the clips, many of the same congressmen you saw go after the Justice Department witnesses in Fast and Furious picked up right where they left off.

Here is Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC). Remember, he is a freshman. If only establishment guys were this tough:



Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), who recently returned from a trip to Libya:



Here is Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID) grilling Ambassador Kennedy for defending U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's assertions on September 16th that the attacks were due to the video. Notice how Kennedy equivocates about whether the attack was known to have been pre-meditated or the result of the video. Labrador then goes to Lt. Col. Wood, who says it was "instantly recognizable as a terrorist attack". This exchange highlights perfectly the contrast between bureaucrats and people who use reason:



Here is Chairman Issa, ripping the two bureaucrats - Kennedy and Lamb. Note Kennedy's argument at the beginning of this exchange. When Issa asks him about multiple unclassified documents, Kennedy actually argues that while the individual documents may be unclassified, they should be considered classified when viewed in their totality. Fortunately, Issa calls him on it and is clearly agitated at the nonsense:



More video exchanges from today's hearing at Oversight YouTube channel.

Is this the John Dodson of the Benghazi attacks?

There are some parallels developing between Operation Fast and Furious and the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. First, the man at the tip of the spear in the Fast and Furious investigation has been Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), chairman of the House Oversight committee. He now appears to be taking the lead in the investigation into why four Americans - including ambassador Christopher Stevens - were murdered in Benghazi.

Another similarity is the reporting of Sharyl Attkisson of CBS. Many might remember that Attkisson was the first and only real mainstream media reporter who investigated Fast and Furious. In fact, she's the one who introduced whistleblower John Dodson to the country in an interview during which the ATF agent dropped the bombshell that ultimately led to Attorney General Eric Holder being found in criminal contempt of Congress. Specifically, Dodson was the first whistleblower to charge that the ATF was allowing guns to walk into Mexico. The death of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry was the last straw for Dodson.

Now, as the Oversight Committee prepares for its first hearing into what happened in Benghazi, Attkisson sat down with Lt. Col. Andy Wood, the man who led the Special Forces "Site Security Team" in Libya before he was told the American mission there would have to do with less. In many ways, Wood does in this interview much of what Dodson did to the Justice Department in Fast and Furious; Wood outs the State Department as being complicit in the Benghazi murders by ignoring calls for more security.

Via CBS News:



Here is Attkisson's interview with Dodson in March of 2011:

Video: Darrell Issa on CNN about Benghazi 9/11 attack

Oversight Chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) has shown real leadership over the last two years. Here he is with CNN's Erin Burnett to discuss the letter he and Rep. Jason Chaffetz sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Carney on letter from Issa to Hillary: No Comment

White House press secretary Jay Carney was asked to respond to a four page letter sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton inquiring about claims that the State Department refused requests by the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi for more security. Carney would not comment.

Via Jake Tapper at ABC:

White House press secretary Jay Carney declined to comment on an assertion by the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that requests from diplomats in Libya for added security prior to the September 11, 2012 attack on the diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, were denied. 

“I’m not going to get into a situation under review by the State Department and the FBI,” Carney said.

Earlier today, chairman of the committee Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the chair of the subcommittee on national security, homeland defense, and foreign operations, wrote to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, asserting that “multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the Committee that, prior to the September 11 (2012) attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these requests by officials in Washington.”

The two congressmen also listed thirteen incidents leading up to the attack – ranging from I.E.D. and RPG attacks to a “posting on a pro-Gaddafi Facebook page” publicizing early morning runs taken by the late Ambassador Chris Stevens and his security detail around Tripoli.

That October 2nd letter sent to Hillary Clinton by Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa and member Jason Chaffetz is quite damning if the accounts of 13 separate incidents or threats to the consulate in Benghazi are accurate. Ditto if the consulate requested additional security and did not receive it. In fact, these claims may be so damning that an Obama administration stonewall could very well make things worse, especially after nearly two years of stonewalling on Fast and Furious which, in many ways, is similar to what happened in Libya.

Both involved the issue of waivers and whether or not the State Department made the right call relative to those waivers, both involved the issue of guns, and both involved the deaths of U.S. Government officials. The primary difference seems to be that Fast and Furious put guns into the hands of bad guys and the State Department appears to have kept guns out of the hands of good guys.

Regarding the issue of waivers... CNN reported recently that the State Department issued a security waiver that prevented the Benghazi consulate from being secure. That waiver would have made it unnecessary for the consulate to have barriers, a safe room, or multiple layers of armed security.



Contrast that with this exchange between Rep. Connie Mack and Hillary Clinton at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in October of last year. Note the issue of a waiver that was required to be issued by the State Department in order for the Department of Justice to legally export weapons to Mexico (Fast and Furious). If Hillary said a waiver was issued, her Department would be on the hook for those weapons going to Mexico. If she said no waiver was issued, it would have implicated Holder's Justice Department.



It would appear that when it comes to the consulate in Benghazi and whether or not waivers were issued, Carney is choosing the same course of action that Hillary did last year in response to questions about Fast and Furious.

Darrell Issa sends letter to Hillary Clinton over Benghazi Security

Fresh off a grueling, near two-year battle with the Justice Department over Operation Fast in Furious, Reps. Darrell Issa and Jason Chaffetz appear to be in the early stages of spearheading another investigation involving guns. This time, they want to know why there weren't any available in Benghazi. Issa and Chaffetz have fired off a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wanting to know why the State Department refused requests to secure the Benghazi consulate.

Via the Oversight website:

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee leaders today sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asking why requests for more protection were denied to the U.S. mission in Libya by Washington officials prior to the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack that killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. The denials came after repeated attacks and security threats to U.S. personnel.

“Based on information provided to the Committee by individuals with direct knowledge of events in Libya, the attack that claimed the ambassador’s life was the latest in a long line of attacks on Western diplomats and officials in Libya in the months leading up to September 11, 2012. It was clearly never, as Administration officials once insisted, the result of a popular protest,” the committee’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and subcommittee chairman, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, write. “In addition, multiple U.S. federal government officials have confirmed to the Committee that, prior to the September 11 attack, the U.S. mission in Libya made repeated requests for increased security in Benghazi. The mission in Libya, however, was denied these resources by officials in Washington.”

The letter outlines 13 security threats over the six months prior to the attack.

Issa has become quite seasoned in the art of long investigations. In fact, in many ways, operation Fast and Furious may be playing itself out in a completely new theater - in Mexico. Issa and Grassley never really let up and don't seem to be willing to do so even now but the work of Univision may permit them to see some of the fruits of their labor as the scandal explodes in the court of public opinion.

Meanwhile, Issa and company can shift their focus to what amounts to the inverse of Fast and Furious in the Middle East. The letter to Clinton chronicles several attacks and incidents in Benghazi that warranted increased security at the consulate.

Fast and Furious was about arming bad guys who murdered innocents. The 9/11 attack in Benghazi appears to be about NOT arming good guys who ended up being the murdered innocents.

Click here to read the entire letter.